Bombardier’s announcement: revising the entry into service (EIS) of the CSeries: came as a surprise to noone. You didn’t even need company insiders to leak information about the slow progress of the test flight campaign. The media front-ending is clue enough: the lack of updates, and the general lowly feeling : gave away a test flight campaign with nothing much to talk about.

Bombardier isn’t the first manufacturer to declare intensive test flight campaigns and program milestones, only to show the world that their program management planning wasn’t planned at all. The trend has been in alphabetical order: Airbus – Boeing – Bombardier. The Airbus A380 and the Boeing 787 programs talked of entry into service dates that were too good, only to be found later that that they were too good to be true.

For Airbus, the A380 was a first: in terms of size, wiring, and a level of coordination in design that was not well coordinated. For Boeing, the airplane was, technically, a new design, with many firsts: technical and production, leading to software issues, and supply issues.

The graph below shows how unique, technically challenging, and possibly operationally “disruptive” airplane programs, show longer periods between the first flight & entry into service (EIS). The A300 was Airbus’ first airplane; the A340 was Airbus’ first quad-jet. The A350 has nothing special about it: it builds upon the A380’s avionics & software; the only thing new is the extent of use of composites. 12 months for the program should be doable.

In comparison to the A380 and the 787 programs, the CSeries is a “stranger” airplane for Bombardier. It is Bombardier’s first all new airliner design (the CRJ series is a derivative of the Challenger from Canadair, the Q400 is a modification of De-Havilland’s turboprop offering), the manufacturer’s first airplane so big, the first airplane in the world to fly with the PW1000G Geared Turbofan Engine (never before has such a large GTF ever flown), the companies first fly-by-wire aircraft, Bombardier’s first foray into designing an all composite wing for a commercial aircraft, and the first use of Al-Li on such scale on a narrowbody aircraft.

It is so new, that it is to Bombardier what the 787 is to Boeing. A great airplane, promising excellent fuel savings, but exhibiting a huge leap in technology & process: a toxic combination that introduces too many variables in one go.

The CSeries program has pushed the first deliverers by nine months to the second half of 2015, taking the time between first flight and EIS to a projected 21 months. The CS300, is expected to enter service 6 months later.

That is terrible news for Bombardier: The CS300 is expected to enter service in early 2016.

The CSeries was the very aircraft that made Airbus and Boeing reengine their airplane. But with the A320NEO planned to enter service in 2015, the popular single aisle family, which members A319NEO and A320NEO compete directly & indirectly with the CS300, will be available earlier, and with a better appeal: thanks to a proven airframe: the A320 family’s. Considering that Airbus can afford upto 25% off on the list prices, the A319NEO can be sold for for US$70.8M, about US$7M costlier than the CS300’s list price. The CS300 burns lesser fuel than the A319NEO, and is expected to have the same operating cost per seat as the A320NEO. The CS300 still has an appeal: massive appeal. Technically that is, operationally: uncertain.

“We are taking the required time to ensure a flawless entry-into-service. We are very pleased that no major design changes have been identified, this gives us confidence that we will meet our performance targets,” said Mike Arcamone, President, Bombardier Commercial Aircraft.

But questions still linger in the minds of most: with so much so new to Bombardier, how reliable will the airplane be? Will the CSeries become the narrowbody “Dreamliner”?

Boeing announced that testing has begun at the Boeing Transonic Wind Tunnel in Seattle to further validate 777X high-speed performance projections. Data from the high-speed tests will help engineers with the configuration development of the airplane, validate computational fluid dynamics (CFD) predictions and support preliminary loads cycle development.

Subsonic wind tunnel testing on the 777X started on Dec. 5, 2013 at QinetiQ’s test facility in Farnborough, U.K., to test the airplane models’ performance at low speeds such as those experienced at takeoff and landing, and at different non-clean configurations, notably with the high lift devices such as flaps and slats.

“We are on track to complete our top-level design in 2014 and reach firm configuration in 2015,”, Terry Beezhold, vice president and chief project engineer of the 777X program, said, back in Dec 2013. “Wind tunnel testing will validate our performance models and generate a vast amount of data that our engineering teams will use to design the airplane in this phase of development.”

The Boeing 777X program, which includes the 777-8X and 777-9X aircraft, is yet to be formally christened.

“I remember when we had very strong demand for A319s, then it shifted to the larger capacity A320 version…and we’re now seeing very, very strong demand for A321s”, explained John Leahy, Airbus’ Chief Operating Officer – Customers, during the 2013-2032 Global Market Forecast press briefing in September, 2013.

Almost a month later, the US Based carrier JetBlue Airways, deferred deliveries of its 100 seat Embraer 190 aircraft, ordering instead 35 Airbus A320 family aircraft: 20 A321NEO and 15 A320CEO aircraft. The airline seeks to reduce costs with the Airbus A320 aircraft which burn less fuel per seat, but with a largr capacity: 150 passengers for the A320 and 190 passengers for the A321.

Back home, and one month before JetBlue’s decision to focus on larger capacity aircraft, the “JetBlue of India”, IndiGo, opted for 20 Airbus A321NEO aircraft, of its 180 all A320 order back in 2011, exercising the option that was inked in the deal.

Airlines, which stayed away from the A321, which accounts for 20% of all Airbus A320 family (A318, A319 CEO+NEO ,A320CEO+NEO, A321CEO+NEO) orders, are now leaning toward the A321NEO because it promises the affordable operating costs that otherwise kept airlines at bay: different aircraft sub-type, and higher operating cost. Suddenly, the A321NEO’s reduced operating costs, thanks to the fuel saving sharklets and the PW1100G Geared Turbofan Engine, make the added 20-30seats affordably attractive.

Statistically, the best performing airline in the country, IndiGo, has the best load factors,: an average of 81.4% over 5 years from 2009-2013, with the highest being 83.8% in 2010. IndiGo’s added capacity, and demand has grown, but the effect on load factors has been nil; the average load factors remain more or less constant. So getting larger airplanes will not have a significant impact on load factors, but may slightly increase profits per flight on account of the reduced operating cost per seat.

A 150 seat airplane like the Airbus A319, or its direct competitor, the Boeing 737-700 is costlier to operate, per seat, as a shorter aircraft isn’t as optimized as the longer aircraft it was derived from. But what if you had an aircraft with a cost per seat as much as that of the A320NEO (which is claimed to be 15% more efficient than the A320 CEO), but with 150 seats? This would make the aircraft cheaper to operate, have lower capacity but push load factors closer to 100%, while keeping the fares low, or possibly lower than the competition.

The smaller, efficient aircraft, like what Bombardier claims of its CSeries CS300, has lesser seats to sell to break even, has the same cost per seat as the A320NEO, costs lesser to operate, but doesn’t have to fly with many empty seats if the tickets are priced low, or lower than the competition, and the brand marketed well.

Assuming that the breakeven load factor (BELF) for a particular, fixed operating environment is 70% for the Airbus A320NEO, and assuming that the CSeries CS300 fitted with 150 seats has a similar BELF, then with the A320NEO, the airline must sell 126 seats to break even, while sell only 105 seats on the CS300 to break even. Considering the average of 150 seats occupied, per flight, on average, the A320NEO flies 24 passengers contributing to the airline’s profits, while the CSeries CS300 flies 45 passengers contributing to the airline’s profits. Of course, if both aircraft flew with 100% load factors, on a dense route, the A320 gets 54 passengers contributing to profits, but that is only a potential, not a guarantee.

Unfortunately, airline pricing and BELF aren’t so simple, but this gives you a rough idea of what is possible with the CSeries CS300 in the Indian market.

For those who didn’t get it: What’s possible is an all CS300-fleet airline, that shoots right into profitability, defeating the competition. Is it this simple? Only IF Bombardier delivers its promise of meeting the projected costs per seat, and if Bombardier’s not-that-great image relating to aircraft dispatch reliability and maintenance issues are sorted: something that will be a challenge considering that almost everything about the aircraft, including the very design, is new, and without decades of airframe maturity like that of Airbus’s or Boeing’s narrowbody market leaders.

The conundrum: Increase capacity and increase both the profit potential as well as the risk of a loss on a route, should the loads go either ways. Decrease capacity and introduce a stronger element of predictability and control, but lowering the profit potential.

The Airbus A350 program achieved another milestone with the successful completion of the ultimate load wing test in December 2013. The ultimate load wing test is a test in which the wing is deflected to simulate the “ultimate” load, beyond or at which the wing is expected to fail.

The ultimate load is calculated as 2.5 times the maximum expected G load that the aircraft would ever encounter in its service life. For the Airbus A350, which is limited in the G loads that it may experience, by the Fly By Wire system to +2.5G, or with the FBW system deactivated, as is the case with a reversion to direct law, approximately between 3-3.5G with the aerodynamic limitations of the flight control surfaces. The ultimate load is then possibly between 7.5 – 8.75G.

Based on this G force, the expected wing flex due to aerodynamic loading is computed, and the wing of a static test airframe flexed (loaded) to the corresponding load. The wing is expected not to fail at this “ultimate” load equivalent flex. At this loading, the A350’s wings flexed in excess of 5 meters, while at a similarly scaled G loading, the A380’s wings flexed to close to 7.5 meters. The 787’s wing flexed up to 7.6 meters in a similar test, mandatory for certification.

In February 2006, the A380’s wing gave way just before the 1.5 times greater G load limit was reached.

Unlike in the past, aircraft manufacturers don’t seem to be stressing the wing beyond 1.5 times greater load, to the point of wing failure. The actual failure load may not be known.

According to Airbus, “This test was performed on the A350 XWB static test airframe that was built specifically to demonstrate the structural integrity of the airframe. The strains induced into the airframe were measured and monitored in real time using more than ten thousand measurement channels. The huge volume of data recorded was analysed and correlated to the structural computer models which have been used to design the airframe.”

With the comforting thought of a safe-enough wing, the first A350 airframe intended for commercial service, MSN6, is being assembled for launch customer Qatar Airways.

Airbus’ marketing seems to have gone on a slightly unrealistic overdrive, with its “Felt squashed on a recent flight? It’s not you, it’s the seat” campaign, which states:

“Airbus offers an entire product line of modern, efficient jetliners designed for today’s standard of passenger comfort: at least an 18-inch wide seat in economy class.”

That statement isn’t true. Data published by Airbus shows that the A320 family’s cabin can have either 18 inch wide seats and a 19 inch aisle, or 17 inch wide seats and a 25 inch aisle. Indigo Airlines has the 17 inch seat option. The campaign doesn’t explicitly mention the “long haul economy standard” set by Airbus, and slyly brings the A320 into the picture as well.

“The company’s entire product line is designed for modern comfort standards, ranging from the single-aisle A320 Family to the widebody A330 and A350 XWB families and the 21st century flagship A380 jetliner – which has a standard 18.5-inch seat in economy class.“

“Seat width is one of the most important – yet often overlooked – factors for passenger comfort. With an extra inch, compared to the 17-inch industry norm set in the 1950s that is still used by other aircraft manufacturers, Airbus jetliners offers travellers more personal space and room for lateral movement.”

Embraer offers 18.25 inch wide seats (though another technical documentation points to 18 inch wide seats) in the economy, across the E Jet series (as per company published data). The C-Series, which has threatened the A318, A319, and in part the A320 members of the A320 family, has seats that (claimed by Bombardier) are a mix of 18.5 inch wise seats and 19 inch seats (see image above). These are far wider, and more comfortable than the seats on the A320, and even the A380 in economy (claimed to be 18.5 inch wide). So, “Airbus cabins are designed to offer passengers and airlines the highest levels of comfort, services and efficiency.“?

Airbus’ inadequate and improper “research”, states “It’s not you, it’s the seat” and “the 17-inch industry norm set in the 1950s” in the same page (CLICK HERE). Truth be told, Rebecca Utz, from the University of Utah, presented a paper, “Obesity in America, 1960-2000: Is it an Age, Period, or Cohort Phenomenon?”, which shows how its “You” and not the “Seat” that has grown too big to fit in a 17 inch wide seat.

With its unwavering focus on meeting its certification program goal of 2,500 hours within 12 months since its first flight on June 14th 2013, Airbus has sent its second A350, MSN 3 (F-WGZZ) to Bolivia, South America, where high altitude tests will be conducted. The tests will be conducted at El Alto International Airport (IATA: LPB, ICAO: SLLP) at La Paz, which is at 13,325ft MSL and has a 13,123ft long east to west runway, and at Jorge Wilstermann International Airport (IATA: CBB, ICAO: SLCB) at Cochabamba, which is at 8,360ft MSL and has a 12,460 ft long south-east to north-west facing runway.

The aircraft landed in Bolivia on 7th January, 2014.

This is the first time that the A350 has crossed the boundaries of Europe, and for the first time undertaken a trans-Atlantic flight, flying for the first time into South America.

According to Airbus, “Operations at such high altitude airfields are particularly demanding on aircraft engines, Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) and systems. The aim of these trials is to demonstrate and validate the full functionality of engines, systems, materials as well as to assess the overall aircraft behaviour under these extreme conditions. A number of take-offs with all engines operating and with simulated engine failures are being performed at each of the airfields to collect data on engine operating characteristics and validate the aircraft take-off performance. The autopilot behaviour will also be evaluated during automatic landings and go-arounds.”

MSN-3 is planned to spend around a week at Bolivia.

Till date, the A350 program has accumulated 800 flight test hours in about 200 flights flown by MSN 1 (F-WXWB) and MSN 3 (F-WGZZ), resulting in an average of 4 hours of testing per test flight. The third A350, MSN- 2, F-WWCF, is assembled and painted, will soon take to the skies, and will be later joined by MSN 4 and MSN 5, to fly test flights in parallel to meet the goal of a 12 month certification program.MSN4 and MSN 5 are being assembled.

Three and a half months after the first C Series took to the skies, the second Flight Test Vehicle, FTV2, registered C-GWYD, took off from Montréal International (Mirabel) Airport on 3rd January, 2014, climbed to 13,000ft, touched 180knots. The maiden flight lasted 2hrs 15 minutes. When compared to the A350’s program, which has a similar target of certifying the aircraft within 12 months with 5 test aircraft, the CSeries’ CS100 FTV2, has taken to the skies almost 2 weeks earlier.

The 5 CS100s will later be joined by 2 CS300s. Interestingly, Bombardier plans the CS300s for a later stage in the testing, when the CS300 accounts for close to 65% of all CSeries Orders (182). In contrast, the A350-900XWB, which accounts for 67% of the 814 orders, is the model that is flying in the test flight campaign.

Says Rob Dewar, Vice President and General Manager, CSeries Program ,“While FTV1 is the initial test vehicle validating the flight envelope, FTV2 testing will complement the existing knowledge we have gained from FTV1 – all of which will ensure the accuracy and efficiency of the data collected. Specifically, we will look to FTV2 to test the aircraft systems and its redundancies, including the brand-new avionics suite, in addition to measuring the aircraft’s performance. The ongoing momentum of the CSeries flight test program has been an energizing experience for the team, and we are eager to apply the knowledge gained from FTV1 and FTV2 to the following flight test vehicles, which will also take flight this new year.”

The Airbus A350 program seems to be on track for the planned 12 month certification program, and the planned entry into service (EIS) in what was earlier reported by Airbus as the “second half of 2014”, and now, more precisely, “Q4 2014”; On Thursday 2nd January 2014 Airbus rolled-out its third A350 XWB flight-test aircraft, MSN2, from the paint shop in Toulouse.

The rolling out of the A350 fitted with a cabin was well timed: January 1st 2014 marked 100 years since the first scheduled commercial airline flight took off, with just one passenger, from St-Pertersburg, Florida, to Tampa, Florida, in a flight that lasted just 23 minutes.

The first A350 to enter commercial service will be for Qatar Airways.

This aircraft, F-WWCF, is the first of two A350 flight test aircraft to be equipped with a full passenger cabin interior, and features a distinctive “Carbon” signature livery to reflect its primary construction from advanced materials. 53% of the A350 XWB’s airframe is made-up of carbon-fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) including Airbus’ first carbon-fibre fuselage.

The other aircraft to be fitted with a cabin will be MSN 5, which is in the final assembly line and is expected to fly in a few months. MSN 1, 3 and 4 are dedicated to avionics, noise testing, and various other systems work through the flight test program. These three aircraft will not be fitted with a cabin, but rather, equipped with heavy flight test installation.

MSN2 will join the A350 XWB flight test fleet in the coming weeks and will be the first A350 to transport passengers when it undertakes the Early Long Flights (ELF) later in the year. The “passengers” will be Airbus employees.

Just when the 747-8’s production rate was ramped down at its Everett facility (state of Washington), Boeing announced that the 737’s production rate will be ramped up at its Renton, Washington facility , from its existing 38 airplanes per month, to 42 per month in the first half of 2014, and next 47 airplanes per month in 2017, the highest rate ever for its best-selling airliner. Boeing currently has more than 3,400 unfilled orders across the 737 family, which includes the 737Max.

Airbus, in contrast, has 4,223 unfilled orders across the Airbus A320 family, which includes the A320NEO. Across its global production facilities, Airbus already produces 42 airplanes a month since 2012, the highest-ever rate for any commercial aircraft, and has no immediate plans for a production ramp up over concerns of supply chain fragility.

The A320 Family is produced on two Airbus assembly lines in Europe: Toulouse, France and Hamburg, Germany; which have been complemented by an additional facility in China. Toulouse is home to the initial assembly line, building A320s; Hamburg has responsibility for the A318, A319 and A321; while Tianjin assembles A319s and A320s.

Airbus has assembled the first major airframe component assembly: the engine pylon for the first A320neo to fly. The pylon was assembled at the dedicated pylon facility in St Eloi in Toulouse.

In parallel with this pylon construction, other major NEO components and subassemblies will shortly be taking shape in factories across various countries. For example, in Hamburg the centre wing-box will soon arrive from Nantes to be integrated in the fuselage, and also the rear fuselage will begin assembly there. In St. Nazaire, the forward fuselage will start assembly in January 2014.

Airbus states that the assembly of MSN5, the fifth and final member of the A350 XWB flight test fleet in the test flight campaign is now underway with the fuselage joining process. This follows the recent arrival of the three fuselage sections at the A350 XWB final assembly line (FAL) in Toulouse, France.

MSN5 is the second of the A350 flight test aircraft that will feature a passenger cabin. MSN 2 and MSN 5 will have the cabin fitted, where Airbus will put passengers on board, with cabin crew. It is for the first time in the history of Airbus that so early in the campaign 2 aircraft have been dedicated to the cabin. Earlier, aircraft would be dedicated about 2 months before the entry into service. Associated with that are delays, a lot of complaints from passengers, and a difficulty of entry into service. This was witnessed in the A320 and the A340 programs.

This aircraft will fly for the first time in Spring 2014 and will be used essentially to perform cabin related flight tests. It will also participate in the Early Long Flights where the “passengers” are Airbus employees. This allows the cabin and related systems to be submitted to near realistic operations in order to ensure a mature cabin at entry into service. In addition, MSN5 will carry out Route Proving flights to demonstrate to the certification authorities that the aircraft performs perfectly in airport operations.

To date the two A350 XWB test aircraft, MSN1 and MSN3 have clocked up over 500 flight test hours in more than 100 test flights. The A350 XWB has already won more than 760 firm orders from 39 customers worldwide. First delivery will be to Qatar Airways in the second half of 2014.

Almost a year after the first Airbus A320 equipped with a sharklet was delivered, Airbus announced the launch of the sharklet retrofit program for in-service A320 aircraft, and will be available in 2015.

This retrofit includes reinforcing the wing structure and adding the Sharklet wingtip device. As part of the upgrade, the retrofit will lengthen the aircraft’s service life and thus maximise the operators’ return on investment for the Sharklet retrofit.

The extent of reinforcement and more details on the sharklets may be viewed here, in this comprehensive article on Winglets and Sharklets.

Airbus will offer the retrofit initially for A320 and A319 models and will evaluate a retrofit for the A321 at a later stage.

The Sharklets’ benefits include a fuel consumption reduction by up to 4 per cent (Only on long sectors), and an extension of mission range by 100 nautical miles or payload capability increase by up to 450 kilogrammes.

Sharklets equipped on new-build A320 Family aircraft have been delivered by Airbus since December 2012, with more than 184 received by customers and operators to date. MSN 5428 is the first sharklet equipped Airbus A320. In India, only two operators of the Airbus A320 feature sharklet equipped A320s in their fleet: IndiGo and GoAir.

In Indigo, VT-IFH onwards, up to the latest, VT-IFV feature sharklets. Out of 71 Airbus A320 in the airline’s fleet, 15 are equipped with sharklets.

In Go Air, VT-GOL onwards, up to the latest, VT-GOP feature sharklets. Out of 18 Airbus A320 in the airline’s fleet, 5 are equipped with sharklets.

There are 112 Airbus A320 in India (excluding A321 and A319), 17.8% of which are equipped with fuel-saving sharklets.

Highlights: The death of the 70 seat regional jet market, shifting market trends, and what airlines seem to trend on: affordable capacity.

50 seat regional jets heralded a new way to travel. Comfort and speed were real reasons, and offering a jet to regional customers, as opposed to a turboprop aircraft, suddenly seemed very attractive. The Embraer ERJ 145, introduced in 1996, and the Bombardier CRJ 100/200, introduced in 1992, both extremely popular 50 seat airplanes, sold 708 airplanes and 935 airplanes, respectively.

Regional aviation only continued to grow, fuelled by more efficient jets that promised good operating economics. According to Bombardier’s study in 1998, there was a growing requirement for larger aircraft in the fleets of the world’s regional airlines. To keep up with the growth in mainline fleets, Bombardier felt that regional fleet must grow in both size and capacity. The company felt that if the regional fleet did not grown beyond 50 seats, the number of 50-seaters required to satisfy demand would quadruple.

Because of this growth, regional airplanes grew in capacity, to match demand. The CRJ 700, a 70 seat regional jet from Bombardier, was introduced in 2001, and the competing Embraer 170 was introduced to airline service in 2004. As airplanes grew in size, the operational costs per seat started to fall, further opening up regional aviation to larger airplanes while gradually declining the smaller regional jet market. The market shifted, and continues to shift towards larger sized regional jets.

The CRJ 100/200 is no longer in production. In 2008, the Embraer 145 had 733 firm orders, which slumped to 708 in 2009, and has remained at that figure, over 4 years till date. By 2011, all orders had been realised through deliveries. The 50 seat jet market effectively and statistically died many, many years ago.

The CRJ 700, when introduced, did exceedingly well. Between 2000 and 2010, the order book grew by 160%, to 344 firm orders. The Embraer 170, which had a late start, touched 194 firm orders in 2009. While these were fairly good figures, the market shift hadn’t stopped.

The Embraer 190, and the CRJ 900 have seen the greatest sales growth. The E-190, when introduced in 2005 with JetBlue, had 185 firm orders. This has seen a fairly steady, and unparalleled growth to 560 in 2013: a growth of 200%. The CRJ1000 was Bombardier’s answer to the E-190, but that entered service very late, almost 5 years later, in December 2010, but firm orders stand at only 70, as of July 2013. The CRJ1000 is not much of a competitor to the E-190; The longest range version of the jet, 1,622NM, falls short of the shortest range version of the E-190: E-190STD at 1800NM. The E-190AR has a range of 2400NM.

While there was such encouraging growth in sales of 100 seat airplanes, The CRJ700 stopped building orders after 2010. In fact, after 2010, 4 firm orders were lost, with the number lazily bouncing back to 347 in 2013. After 2009, The Embraer 170’s firm orders only reduced, and hasn’t recovered since. It’s not the manufacturer. It’s the market, and the 70 seat regional jet isn’t favoured anymore. As of Sep 2013, there is a backlog of only 6 E-170, of which 2 are for Japan Airlines and 4 for ETA Star Aviation, India.

The 78-88 (80) seat E-175 is the next-best received aircraft. Orders for the type are nowhere close to that of its longer, 100 seat E-190, and had stagnated for more than 1 year in the period after 2011, at the level of the dead-market E-170. A sudden surge in orders, of 65% to 315 in 2013, is thanks to Skywest, which placed a large enough order for the type. The 90 seat CRJ900, has 306 firm orders in 2013, and witnessed a 380% surge in orders between 2005 and 2007.

A 2000NM range airplane with the ability to carry 100 passengers has been the hottest selling cake. Add another 16 to 24 seats and the offering, the E-195, isn’t quite as attractive. Bombardier’s response to the E-195 is the 125 CS100, and the unique, hitherto unmatched offering is the 135-160 seat CS300.

Proof that the market is shifting away from 70 seat jets is the fact that Embraer, that has moved forward with its plans to re-engine, significantly re-engineer and update the E-Jets to a “Second generation” of E2 jets, has the E-195-E2, the E-190-E2, and the E-175-E2, but no plans at all for the E-170-E2.

The market needs higher capacity airplanes for greater flexibility, provided that it doesn’t come at the cost of economics and performance. With economically better performing or promising airplanes hitting the market, “affordable capacity” is the market demand.

And since the E-175-E2 is planned for a 2020 Entry into service (EIS): the last amongst all re-engined E-Jets, it’s a sign of the 80 seat regional jetliner’s grave being prepared, next.

*This section is part of a much bigger, comprehensive article on the C-Series by The Flying Engineer.

This article focuses only on airplane manufacturing and does not cover aerospace services or aerospace manufacturing services. In this article: Mahindra Aerospace’s story: how it was born; 8 seat piston to be manufactured near Bangalore, in 2 years time; GippsAERO brandname no longer exists, replaced by Mahindra Aerospace; Mahindra eyeing Beechcraft.

The birth and growth of Mahindra Aerospace

Mahindra’s foray into the aerospace segment was with the acquisition of 88.41% stake in Plexion Technologies (India) Limited (Plexion) in the year 2006. The main aim was to complement and help grow Mahindra Engineering Services portfolio in the automotive sector. But Plexion also offered Engineering Services to the Aerospace sector.

Plexion’s modest presence in aerospace made the Mahindra group ponder over the prospect of stepping into the aviation industry, for a year. Seeing the potential, the Mahindra group chose to focus on aircraft, and aerospace structures, creating the Mahindra Aerospace division in 2007, to expand the group’s existing automotive design and manufacturing expertise to the aerospace industry. The majority acquisition of Plexion brought to Mahindra the NM-5, a 5 seat (including the pilot’s) airplane being developed by NAL (and now with Mahindra in a 50:50 partnership) as an extension to the 2 seat Hansa aircraft.

But it was only in 2009 that Mahindra entered the aerospace manufacturing segment with the simultaneous acquisition of a majority stake in two Australian companies, Aerostaff Australia and Gippsland Aeronautics, which later became GippsAERO. While one is a component manufacturer of high-precision close-tolerance aircraft components and assemblies for large aerospace OEMs, essential to catapult M&M into the burgeoning Defence Offset and Commercial Aviation market, Gippsland Aeronautics (GA) is an established general aviation aircraft manufacturer, known primarily for its piston powered 8 seat GA-8 Airvan.

The NM-5 program got a boost with the capabilities that GippsAERO brought with it. 5 years after the preliminary design of the aircraft commenced, the aircraft took to the skies, although in Australia, on 1st September 2011 and lasted 45 minutes. The aircraft is yet to be certified.

An stretched version of the GA-8, the turboprop GA-10, with the capability to seat 10 persons, first flew in the May of 2012, and is expected to be certified in the first quarter of 2014. Prior to the acquisition, GippsAERO in 2008 had announced that it had won bidding to take over the type certificate of the Australian Government Aircraft Factories (GAF) Nomad’s design, renaming it the GA-18, and will re-engineer (the original design was problematic and resulted in 32 write-offs, claiming 76 lives) and put back into production the 18 seat airplane, once the GA-10’s certification is through.

Since the February of 2013, as part of a unified branding strategy, the “GippsAERO” name has been dropped and replaced by Mahindra Aerospace, renaming the aircraft portfolio Mahindra Aerospace GA-8, GA-10 and GA-18.

Acquisition is preferable to organic growth, especially for a starter in aerospace, today. “You cannot spend a lot of time developing three or four aircraft and getting them certified,” said Arvind Mehra, executive director and chief executive of Mahindra Aerospace, in an interview with Flightglobal, years back. “This would take forever. We looked at various targets, and finally bought GippsAERO in Australia, which gave us three aircraft (GA-8, GA-10, GA-18) on day one.”

This is no different from Bombardier’s approach. The Canadian planemaker got into aerospace in 1986 with the acquisition of Canadair, followed by the acquisition of Short Brothers, Learjet, de Havilland Aircraft: all of which produced excellent aircraft but were in the red.

According to Bloomberg, Mahindra Aerospace has now set its sights on the acquisition of Beechcraft Corporation, the aircraft manufacturer known for its popular King Air turboprops, Beechcraft Baron, and Beechcraft Bonanza, and the Hawker series of Business Jets, but had entered bankruptcy in May 2012, and exited Bankruptcy in the February of 2013, and is looking at auctioning off its business, for around US$ 1.5B.

Richard Aboulafia, an analyst at the Teal Group in Fairfax, Virginia, feels, “[Mahindra’s] own indigenous development program, which is what they’ve been looking at, has a much higher risk than acquiring Beechcraft. If you can get a good deal on an existing family of planes, that’s definitely an easier way.” Besides, it opens the doors to the North American aerospace industry.

But acquiring the troubled plane maker which is planning on shutting its business jet production and focusing only on its piston and turboprop offerings, may deter Mahindra with the US$1.5B figure.

Local Airplane manufacturing

Narsapur, 40 kilometres from the aviation capital of India, Bangalore, witnessed the setup of Mahindra Aerospace’s manufacturing facility, in technical collaboration with Aeronova, a Spanish company specialising in the design and manufacture of major airframe assemblies. In 2 years, the GA-8 is expected to be manufactured in the country, making it the first private player to build certified aircraft in the normal and commuter categories, in the country.

The inauguration of this facility helps realise the dreams of Mahindra Aerospace. In the August of 2011, while announcing the development of the manufacturing facility at Narsapur, Hemant Luthra, President – Mahindra Systech, which takes care of the group’s aero service business, and member of the Group Executive Board, expressed the group’s ambitions. “From the family of Mahindra Aerospace planes that include the NM5, we would be disappointed if in 3-5 years time we were not clocking a rate of 100 aircraft per annum in India. This rate could get accelerated if we include exports to China and other countries.”

In the same year, Mehra had said to Flightglobal that he sees Mahindra Aerospace becoming the Embraer of India, carving out a niche in a world dominated by big Western players. “Embraer grew out of a country with no aviation experience. They competed with Boeing and Airbus and made a space for themselves. Embraer is a beautiful story.”

Boeing announced that it will adjust the production rate for the 747-8 program from 1.75 airplanes to 1.5 airplanes per month through 2015 because of lower market demand for large passenger and freighter airplanes.

“This production adjustment better aligns us with near-term demand while stabilizing our production flow, and better positions the program to offer the 747-8’s compelling economics and performance when the market recovers,” said Eric Lindblad, vice president and general manager, 747 Program, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. “Although we are making a small adjustment to our production rate, it doesn’t change our confidence in the 747-8 or our commitment to the program.”

The company expects long-term average growth in the air cargo market to begin returning in 2014, and forecasts global demand for 760 large airplanes (such as the 747-8) over the next 20 years, valued at $280 billion. The large aircraft market is unpredictable, but Boeing had attempted to predict it during the A380 program: that the market was shifting away from very large airplanes to smaller ones. In 2012, Boeing Commercial Airplanes marketing vice president Randy Tinseth had said, referring to historic statistics “demand has been met by more flights to more places, rather than by bigger aircraft.” He pointed out that the outlook figure for large-aircraft demand had fallen.

The trend is toward lower capacity, large twin engine aircraft that are more fuel efficient and cost effective.

Lufthansa is already considering an early 747-8 retirement, replacing it with the 777-9X. Lufthansa CEO Christoph Franz has stated his preference for a twin over a quad jet, simply because of the inherent efficiencies.

To date, the 747-8 has accumulated 107 orders for passenger and cargo versions, 56 of which have been delivered. Of these, the 747-8I, the passenger version, has orders for only 40 units, of which 17 have been delivered. 9 have been delivered to Lufthansa, the only airline operator of the type, and 8 to VIP customers: Prince Sultan Bin Abdulaziz, Royal Flight Oman, State of Kuwait, Qatar Amiri Flight (3), and the United Arab Emirates Government.

The first delivery at the new production rate is expected in early 2014. According to Boeing, The production rate change is not expected to have a significant financial impact.

In this piece, we look into the significance of the E-Jets, particularly the 100 seat E-190, and the need for the Brazilian manufacturer’s launch of the upgraded, “Second generation” E-Jets.

The Embraer E-Jets: Making Regional Sense.

Bombardier stepped into the 70 seat jet space with the introduction of its CRJ700 into commercial operations in 2001, with Brit Air. 3 years later, Embraer introduced its 70 seat jet to commercial operations, with LOT Polish airlines. Till date, 192 Embraer E-170s have been sold, while the 70 seat CRJ700 has sold 347 airplanes.

One Embraer regional jet, that has been very well received, is the 100 seat Embraer 190, which, till date, has raked up 560 orders. No other Bombardier 70+ seat aircraft, including the C-Series has managed to touch those numbers, yet.

The Embraer 190 makes absolute sense. The typical single class cabin of the airplane accommodates 100 passengers comfortably. JetBlue, the largest operator of the E-190 with 59 aircraft, complements its Airbus A320 fleet of 129 aircraft. Jet Blue’s A320s are fitted with 150 seats.

Way back in 2003, when JetBlue had an all-Airbus A320 fleet and the cabins had 156 seats, the break-even load factor (BELF), as published by the airline, was around 72%, corresponding to 112 seats. To open up more routes which would have a demand less than this BELF, the 100 seat Embraer 190 was introduced in 2005. In the light of its reduced A320 seating, and spiralling fuel prices, the airline’s A320’s BELF has only gone up, further stressing the need for the Embraer 190.

Embraer acknowledges that a big advantage for E-Jet operators today is their ability to use the aircraft to “right-size” in lower-density markets.

But also acknowledged in 2010 was the realisation that if Airbus or Boeing re-engine their narrowbodies, and achieve better costs per trip, the advantage enjoyed by the E-Jets would disappear.

The upgrade saga

This left only two options for Embraer: Introduce a clean-sheet airplane that competes with Airbus and Boeing’s popular narrowbody families-A320 and 737-an idea that has played with Embraer since 2009; or do something to the existing offering to retain the regional jet family’s attractiveness to operators.

Late 2011, Embraer formally confirmed its decision to abandon the development of a competing airplane (which otherwise would have put 4 players in the coveted segment, including Bombardier with its C-Series), and instead focus on enhancing the value of the Embraer 170 and 190 families through a possible stretch and a definite re-engine, at an estimated program cost of US$1.7 billion. This was the outcome of Boeing announcing the delivery of the 737Max in 2017: a period too short for Embraer to both hold its grip on the market with its existing offering while developing a competing airliner. This also reflects the industry’s lower appetite for risk.

Embraer started working with E-Jet customers to define the performance goals and technical characteristics of the new aircraft family. One of the considerations was a composite airframe. Early 2012, Air Lease Corp advised Embraer to stretch the Embraer E-190 by 1 row (4 seats) and the E-195 by 2-3 rows (8-12 seats). The aim was to add capacity to compete with the CS100, while allowing for pricing flexibility in the light of much lower development costs associated with an airplane upgrade rather than a clean sheet design. Adding to this advantage is the huge customer base of Embarer’s E-Jets. A customer would prefer an upgrade “within the aircraft family” for near-seamless operational integration, rather than an all-new aircraft.

Embraer claims to be not just re-engining, but investing heavily to achieve the efficiency of a clean-sheet design. In January 2013, Embraer selected the Pratt and Whitney Geared Turbofan PW1000G series to power the second generation E170 and E190/E195 aircraft, which it calls the “E-Jet E2 family”. The wings will feature a higher aspect ratio, longer wingspan, and raked wing tips instead of winglets. The landing gear will be lengthened to accommodate the larger engines, and the flight deck will feature the Honeywell’s Primus Epic™ 2 advanced integrated avionics system with large landscape displays, advanced graphics capabilities, and Honeywell’s Next Generation Flight Management System (NGFMS). The new airplanes will be 100% fly-by-wire, unlike the in-production E-Jets.

Unlike the C-Series, the wings for the E-Jet E2 are all metal, as, according to Embraer, composites aren’t cost-effective for such-sized airplanes. Embarer’s late announcement of the selection of the geared turbofan actually stands in its favour: the airframer benefits from Pratt and Whitney’s work on the smaller PW1200G for the Mitsubishi Regional Jet (MRJ), and the larger, mature PW1500G for the C-Series, both of which engine families are almost identical to those being offered for the E-Jets.: The PW1700G for the E175-E2 and the larger PW1900G for the E190/195-E2.

The reason to select the Geared Turbofan is not just the gear in the fan, which optimises fan speeds for greater efficiencies. The significant thermal margins available can allow for future engine thrust upgrades, allowing for further aircraft upgrades with the same engine family.

Plane Facts & 4-cast

The E-175 E2 can seat 88 passengers in a single class, in a comfortable 31” seat pitch. The in-production E-175 can seat only 78 passengers, comfortably, and 88 with an undesirable 29” seat pitch.

The E-190-E2, which is poised to continue the legacy of the well-performing in production E-190, comfortably seats an additional 6 passengers in a uniform 31” seat pitch. The existing E-190 can seat 114 passengers, but with a compromised seating comfort. The fuel efficiencies of the E-190-E2 lend it more range than the E-190.

The E-195-E2 seats 132 passengers in a uniform 31” seat pitch. The In-production E-195 can seat no more than 124 passengers in high capacity, and 116 in single class (with 31% of the seats featuring a 32” pitch, and 69% featuring a 31” pitch). Sometime in 2009, Embraer had studied an aircraft of such capacity, dubbed the E-195X, which would have used the same engines as the E-195. The concept was eventually dropped in 2010 the light of degraded aircraft performance in the absence of a re-engine.

Owing to its poor sales and the drop in demand for 70 seat jets, the E-170 won’t be re-engined.

Embraer’s best bet is on the 106 seat E-190-E2, and hence is focusing all its energy in targeting an entry-into-service (EIS) of mid-2018. The E-195-E2 will follow in 2019, and the E175-E2 in 2020.

Embraer foresees a demand for 6,400 commercial jets with capacity of up to 130 seats, over the next 20 years. With more than 1,200 E-Jets orders, Embraer has achieved a 42% market share in its segment. While Embraer will aggressively compete with Bombardier’s CS100, its present and future E-Jet offering has, and will eclipse Bombardier’s present line up of the CRJ family: CRJ700, CRJ900 and the CRJ1000, all three now marketed with the NextGen suffixes. Embraer is poised to grab a large share of that forecasted market.

*This section builds on research for a comprehensive article on the C-Series by The Flying Engineer.

Bombardier’s success with the CRJ 100/200 airplanes, which eventually sold 935 units, made it explore significantly larger capacity airplanes, in the 100 seat segment. According to Bombardier’s study in 1998, there was a growing requirement for larger aircraft in the fleets of the world’s regional airlines. To keep up with the growth in mainline fleets, Bombardier felt that regional fleet must grow in both size and capacity. The company felt that if the regional fleet did not grown beyond 50 seats, the number of 50-seaters required to satisfy demand would quadruple.

Bombardier identified a gap between its 50-70 seat CRJ series, and the smallest of the Airbus and Boeing single aisle offering: the Airbus A318 and the Being 737-600, both with typical single class capacity of around 120 passengers. Even before a formal launch, Bombardier had unveiled during the Farnborough Air show in 1998 the 88 seat BRJ-X-90 and the 110 seat BRJ-X-110, the “BRJ” short for Bombardier Regional Jet.

The BRJ-X-110 was applauded by airlines as a true 100 seat airplane, unlike attempts by Airbus and Boeing to scale down much larger airplanes. Although during that time, the first of the Brazilian Embraer E-Jets, the 80 seat ERJ 170, competitor to the CRJ700, hadn’t yet taken to the skies, published drawings of the BRJ-X airplanes bore an external resemblance to the new Embraer jets. But the cabin was wider, with a 5 abreast seating.

Threats from the new Embraer jets, which had a significant head start, and the then Fairchild-Dornier’s 50-110 seat regional jetliners, forced Bombardier to rethink the BRJ program. Late 1999, despite having further matured the design of its “paper airplanes”, Bombardier switched focus from the BRJ-X-90 to the stretched CRJ700: the 90 seat CRJ 900. According to Michael Graff, the then President of Bombardier Aerospace, “ They (airlines) have told us that a simple stretch of the CRJ 700series rather than an all new aircraft in the 90 seat category will meet their requirements for increased capacity at reduced acquisition and operating costs”

Mid 2000, although the BRJ-X-90 was killed, the entire BRJ program was suspended, but never cancelled. In the March of 2004, the 114 seat Embraer 190 took to the skies on its first flight, and Bombardier had no airplane to compete in that class. In July of the same year, Bombardier announced the development of the C Series as a replacement for the shelved BRJ-X project.

The C Series then had two variants: the 125 seat CS110 and the 145 seat CS130. But after failing to secure significant orders, and in the light of the certification of the Embraer 190 in 2005, the program was shelved in early 2006, and the focus again shifted to lengthening the CRJ series, to a 100 seat CRJ1000.

In the July of 2006, EASA certified the 124 passenger Embraer 195, competing directly with the shelved CS110. Bombardier was trailing its only significant regional jet competitor, Embraer, with no competing airplane.

Early 2007, Bombardier re-commenced work on the C Series program. In the July of 2008, Bombardier officially launched the C Series, with a letter of interest for 60 aircraft and 30 options from Lufthansa.

Having the right product at the right time bode well for the Brazilian airframer. The CRJ 700, 900 and 1000 combined have orders (as of 30 June 2013) of 723 airplanes, of which 91 are unfulfilled. On the other hand, the Brazilian Embraer E-Jets, comprising the E-170/175 and 190/195 families, have total firm orders of 1213, of which 266 are unfulfilled. Bombardier had to stop trailing and start leading, and focus on the clean sheet C Series was the only way out.

*This section is part of a much bigger, comprehensive article on the C-Series by The Flying Engineer.

Robert “Rob” Dewar, Vice President and General Manager, C-Series, Bombardier Commercial Program, gave a brief insight into the certification program of the C-Series, one month after it’s first flight on the 16th of September, 2013.

The C-Series is poised to usher in a new era for Bombardier, while posing as a market threat for popular Airbus and Boeing single aisle aircraft.

There have been a total of 3 test flights till date.

The landing gear and certification tests have been completed for the shimmy. Shimmy is an unstable lateral (yaw) vibration, typically in the range of 10 to 30Hz, which can lead to structural damage and/or collapse of the landing gear. Landing gear as seen on aircraft such as the Airbus A320 family, Boeing 737NG family and the C-Series, among others, are twin wheeled cantilevered, and such landing gears may experience shimmy stability problems at low speeds, and must be tested to validate the design of the landing gear against shimmy.

The ground vibration test of the aircraft is in progress. This testing is part of the plane’s certification program. Selected parts of the aircraft are excited with an external oscillatory force. By observing the aircraft’s response to these vibrations, engineers can model the aircraft’s transfer functions and determine the airplane’s in-flight stability.

These tests results will be compiled and will determine when the airplane takes to the skies for the fourth time, when the test flight envelope will be further opened up. The last three flights have witnessed the C-Series reaching an altitude of 25,000ft, landing gear extension and retraction cycles, tests of both high lift devices: the slats and flaps, and other in-flight manoeuvres.

The aircraft’s performance an handling closely matches the predicted flight model in the simulator. Bombardier is using a Engineering Flight Simulator (ESIM),built by CAE, from the last one year to test actual flight systems and system controllers when integrated in the aircraft, such as the slat-flap computer, fly-by-wire computer, landing gear computer, APU-simulator, brake computers, the PW1500G Engine FADECs (Full Authority Digital Engine Computer), and so forth. Using this ESIM, the flight test program can rely a lot on the simulator to do a lot of the system and integration tests while also preparing flight test crew for various flight test exercises. This builds the confidence of the crew in the aircraft, while also helping complete real flight test exercises with higher success rates and lower risks. System testing has entered the certification testing phase.

Bombardier find the structural test results, in the certification phase, very pleasing. Testing on the cabin management system as well as the environmental control system are in progress.

The CS100 Flight Test Vehicles (FTV) 2, 3, 4, and 5, as well as the first production aircraft are in very advanced stages of final assembly at Mirabel. The larger CS-300’s first major fuselage section is being transported, expected to arrive at the presently non-optimised-for-the-C-Series Mirabel facility.

Which is why the construction of a new 667,000 sq-ft plant, located close to its current facilities in the vicinity of the airport in Mirabel, Quebec, entirely dedicated to the assembly of the CSeries family of aircraft, is progressing well.

According to Charles “Chuck” Ellis, Chief Flight Test Pilot C-Series, emphasising on the need for so many flight test vehicles, “We say it’s (certification program) a one year program but within that one year we’ll probably be doing 5 years of work. We can take one year and 5 airplanes, or 5 airplanes and one year”

Now that the ESIM’s flight and system model has been verified, it will making the certification easier and faster by offering a lot of flexibility and bandwidth in the C-Series certification program, as it is almost like having a 6th airplane in the fleet.

ATR has proved in recent years to be successful in South East Asia, a market which experiences strong development of its regional networks. Since 2005, ATR has sold over 170 new firm aircraft to South East Asian carriers, accounting for 98% of all regional aircraft with up to 90 seats sold in the region during this period.

Garuda Indonesia, the flag carrier of Indonesia, is expanding its fleet with a firm commitment to lease 25 ATR 72-600s, with options for 10 more, from Nordic Aviation Capital (NAC), based in Billund, Denmark. NAC, in June 2013, placed an order for 90 ATR aircraft, including ATR 42-600s. With this, the leasing company’s ATR fleet grows to 150 aircraft. Garuda Indonesia joins Indonesian Lion Air’s subsidiary, Wings Air, as an ATR operator. Wings Air is ATR’s largest customer for the ATR 72s. Together with Garuda/s ATR 72s, Indonesia alone will may have more than 100 ATR 72 aircraft in the next two years. Some of these ATRs make their way to Lion Group’s Malindo.

Malaysia Airlines and ATR inked a deal in late 2012 for the purchase of a total of 36 ATR 72-600s (20 firm orders plus 16 options) to be operated by the airline’s regional subsidiaries, MASwings and Firefly. The two subsidiaries have started receiving their ATR 72-600 aircraft.

Myannmar’s Air KBZ, which already operated ATR 72-500s, received two ATR 72-600s this year.

ATR opened its Flight Training Centre at Singapore on the 14th of December 2013. With more than 250 ATR aircraft flying in the Asia-Pacific region, with 50 operators, it was only prudent to bring a training centre closer to a region of high significance.

Just months after the training centre was opened, the simulator is running at full capacity. With the encouraging response, ATR has chosen to open another training center, this time in partnership with an ATR operator, Avianca, in Bogota.

ATR penetrated Japan with Link, an operator that plans to start operations by the end of 2013. Link will acquire three ATR 72-600s, becoming the first carrier in Japan to operate ATR aircraft.

The 50th edition of the Paris Air Show was the best in the history of the Franco-Italian aircraft manufacturer ATR. Over the course of the week, the turboprop aircraft manufacturer announced orders for 173 planes, including 83 firm orders at the air show. The order book also ensures ATR’s production until the end of 2016.

Maintenance Expansion: India.

As part of the steadily planned expansion of the ATR MRO Network, ATR, on 11th October, called for tenders to initiate the selection process of an ATR MRO Network member in India to cover the geographical region.

Shifting Markets & Support.

During the show, ATR announced orders from markets which have proved among the most promising in recent years: the aircraft leasing companies and Latin America. This has prompted ATR to shift its office in North America. “Across Latin and South America, we are seeing a big rise in the sheer number of ATRs in service, as we win over new operators and current clients increase the number of turboprops in their fleets. So it makes sense for us to relocate our North America office to Miami to be close to all our customers across the whole of the Americas”, says Filippo Bagnato, Chief Executive Officer, ATR.

On October 14th, exactly 4 months after the 1st A350 took to the skies amidst much media coverage, the second A350 test vehicle, Serial number 003 (MSN 3), took to the skies, allowing the program to not inch, but take confident strides towards an early certification and hopefully, and early introduction into service. Till date, the A350 has flown about 330 flight test hours over almost 70 flights.

With Airbus hoping to contain the flight test campaign within 12-13 months, to enable deliveries by mid 2014, a lot of flight testing needs to be compressed in this period, possible only with 5 test flight airplanes. This aggressiveness is to get to the market early, to “overtake its US rival Boeing to become the world’s biggest producer within four or five years”, as envisioned by Airbus chief Fabrice Bregier.

MSN1, the first A350 to take to the skies, is followed by MSN 3 and will be followed by MSN 4. These will be used for avionics, noise testing, and various other systems work through the flight test program. MSN 3 will have a greater focus on the Rolls Royce engines, and is similar to MSN 1: no cabin but equipped with heavy flight test installation. MSN 2 and MSN 5 will have the cabin fitted, where Airbus will put passengers on board, with cabin crew. It is for the first time in the history of Airbus that so early in the campaign 2 aircraft have been dedicated to the cabin. Earlier, aircraft would be dedicated about 2 months before the entry into service. Associated with that are delays, a lot of complaints from passengers, and a difficulty of entry into service. Thsi was witnessed by the A320 and the A340 programs.

MSN 1 had the most important role: freezing the aerodynamic configuration, being subject to minor changes to make sure the airplane is exactly how it should be, fine tuning the handling qualities, and making accurate performance measurements. The goal is to have something that handles very similar to the A330, as it is very important in the certification campaign to get a common type rating for pilots to fly the 330 and 350 in parallel, to allow mixed fleet flying.

The world of test flights

Flight test pilots preparing for the first flight of the A350 on June 14th, 2013.

At Toulouse, Airbus has 25 test pilots, of which 15 are developmental test pilots and 10 production test pilots. There are more test pilots at Hamburg, and about 2 at China.

Says one of Airbus’ former developmental test pilots, Pierre Baud, who was with Airbus for more than 30 years, being part of the maiden flights of the A310, A300-600, A320, A340 and A321, “When we talk about pilots, we have to divide the pilot population in two. Airline pilots do not generally dream to be experimental test pilots. They will dream to be a captain on the A380 or Concorde, but they don’t expect to be experimental test pilots. Airline pilot and test pilot are two jobs that are very different. All the pilots walking in the environment of the aircraft manufacturer wish to be one day be an experimental test pilot. Which means that they have all the qualifications to perform a first flight. Because there are a lot of test pilots which are essentially production pilots in that case they wish to be upgraded to an experimental test pilot. Most pilots employed by an aircraft manufacturer dream to be an experimental test pilot.”

Flight Test Pilots and Flight Test Engineers

Engineers from Airbus checking-out the Sharklet test station aboard A320 MSN 5098. The first new-production A320 jetliner equipped with Airbus’ fuel-saving Sharklets – which rolled out from the final assembly line in April 2. Photo: Airbus.

Pilots are responsible for the safety of the aircraft. They fly the aircraft and carry out the various manoeuvres that are required. The test flight engineer has a very special role as usually he is very familiar with the aircraft as it’s gone through the build process. He knows intimately its limitations, and modifications. He’ll be the third pair of eyes, really, in the cockpit, to make sure that everything is running smoothly, with all the systems in the background working as they should. In addition, there are the flight test engineers down at the back, at their stations where they can monitor all the systems in much more detail , directing the flight test process itself.

Pilots tend to multitask, not dedicated to specific tests. The flight test engineers tend to be more specialized, and are called upon according to their specialty. It is important to have many pilots fly the aircraft because one the fine tuning of the flight controls may be very satisfactory for a small set of pilots, but the need is to expose the aircraft to a large number of pilots, including those of the training center, who are not test pilots. In the development process, certain flights aren’t too difficult, allowing training pilots to fly the aircraft, thereby exposing the fly-by-wire and handling to a large number of people, as it finally needs to be satisfactory for the entire pilot community.

There are test pilots who have the capacity to quickly learn, understand and fine tune flight control laws (handling qualities), and those who are better suited to develop a complex system such as a Flight Management System (FMS).

“The best is to be able to do both!”, says Jacques Rosay, Chief Test Pilot, Airbus.